Slashdot Mirror


Spirit Rover Makes Longest Trip Yet

ivan1011001 writes "Spirit traveled just over 88 feet in an attempt to visit the crater "Bonneville" to look for evidence of water on Mars. Engineers had hoped the rover would travel 164 feet, but Spirit didn't cover the full distance because it spent more time than initially planned studying rocks and soil along the way. This is longer than its earlier PR of 70 feet."

65 of 229 comments (clear)

  1. well... by xao+gypsie · · Score: 5, Funny

    at least it moves faster than my grandmother...

    --


    xao
    http://TheHillforum.hopto.org
    1. Re:well... by Rotting · · Score: 3, Funny

      Continental drift is faster than my grandmonther.

    2. Re:well... by boojum.cat · · Score: 5, Funny
      Continental drift is faster than my grandmonther.

      Continental drift is exactly as fast as my grandmother.

      --
      Lost: one sig, witty, 120 chars, sentimental value. Reward offered.
    3. Re:well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      I think the reason it went so slow was not because it was "studying rocks" but because it takes a lot of time to transmit the message "Wouldn't you like to be a pepper to?" and "neeeeeed iiiiinnnpuuuuut".

  2. another spirit record by moojin · · Score: 5, Funny

    After successfully completing a journey of 88 feet yesterday, the Spririt Mars Rover completed a journey of 88 feet 2 inches today. This is a new Mars distance record.

    --
    Why did I lurk so long before registering for a Slashdot account? I could have had a Slashdot ID of less than 100000.
  3. Let me guess... by rackniraz · · Score: 5, Funny

    it was up on a hill, and the brakes malfunctioned...

  4. Any evidence. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Have anyone of them found any evidence of past weather yet?

    Seems like everything they look at is of vulcanic origin.

    1. Re:Any evidence. by GTRacer · · Score: 5, Funny
      I'd be a bit surprised if they found *ANY* Vulcan relics, as they're on Mars, not Vulcan. But I hear the weather's pretty similar...

      GTRacer
      - IDIC

      --
      Defending IP by destroying access to it? That makes sense, RIAA/MPAA. Go to the corner until you can play nice!
  5. Reasoning by swordboy · · Score: 4, Funny

    It was probably cloudy out (negating some of the efficiency of the solar panels). I hope that it finds water.

    --

    Life is the leading cause of death in America.
    1. Re:Reasoning by mikerich · · Score: 4, Informative
      Yea, but clouds? I know it not hot and gassy enough to have gas clouds. And if it had water clouds that would have made the news a long time ago.

      Mars has some temporary cloud cover around mountains where air is forced up into cooler regions of the atmosphere. There are also some fogs and clouds around the polar caps where water vapour and carbon dioxide condense out of the atmosphere, but that's about it.

      There are some beautiful images here.

      Best wishes,
      Mike.

    2. Re:Reasoning by swordboy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Only on slashdot do I make an attempt at geeky humor and learn something in the process.

      --

      Life is the leading cause of death in America.
  6. (TA)RDIS by Space+cowboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    (Time And)Relative Dimensions in space... for the uninformed :-)

    Anyone else think it's sort of funny that you have a probe that travels millions of miles to another planet, and the news is that it's then travelled a further 88 feet :-)

    Simon.

    --
    Physicists get Hadrons!
    1. Re:(TA)RDIS by Zakabog · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Anyone else think it's sort of funny that you have a probe that travels millions of miles to another planet, and the news is that it's then travelled a further 88 feet :-)

      Well think of it this way, spirit was launched through space flying towards mars at very high speeds, crashed into the martian surface, got out and managed to move 88 feet. That's increadible, the ability to land and still function on mars is more increadible than the fact that it made it their. NASA is fairly decent at launching stuff towards targets in space, the problem is having that stuff still work when it hits the target.

    2. Re:(TA)RDIS by whizzter · · Score: 5, Insightful

      the most important thing to consider here apart from those things is that the movement is made by an AI,
      thus travelling even a feet requires alot of analysis so it doesn't get stuck or fall down some slope.
      and because of all conditions surrounding this, i doubt they're using a computer that can be called fast by todays standards.

  7. Could this be a problem in the future by ObviousGuy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If the Mars rover is wont to go off on its own accord to discover and analyze things instead of following the directions given to it by mission control, could this possibly have disastrous side effects?

    What if there were an impending rock-slide and instead of maneuvering out of the way as mission control told it to, it decided to look at the shiny rocks instead and got crushed in the process?

    A little 'intelligence' is important for these things to figure out how to move around correctly, but artificial 'curiosity' seems to be problematic.

    --
    I have been pwned because my /. password was too easy to guess.
    1. Re:Could this be a problem in the future by avalys · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't think it was artificial curiosity - Mission Control gave it instructions to the effect of: "study these rocks, then move towards the crater". They thought it would take x minutes to study the rocks, leaving enough time to travel 164 feet, but instead it took 2x minutes, and the rover only had enough time left to travel 88 feet.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank.
    2. Re:Could this be a problem in the future by fatwreckfan · · Score: 4, Informative

      With a maximum speed of 10 feet/min, I don't think it would be avoiding any rockslides, period.

    3. Re:Could this be a problem in the future by kylegordon · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The software is designed to be given instructions from mission control, and then to act out these instructions in the best possible way. Mission Control tell the rover to drive from A to B, and then leaves the rover to figure out which rocks that it can climb over, and which rocks it will have to drive around. The rover most likely spent too long 'analyzing' the rocks to figure out the best way (after all, have a look at the kind of environment Spirit has landed in).

      If there's a Landslide in progress, the rover is humped - either way. The rover will not be programmed to take avoiding action, or to override the instructions from mission control. It simply figures out the best way from A to B.

      HTH

    4. Re:Could this be a problem in the future by TheWickedKingJeremy · · Score: 4, Funny

      What if there were an impending rock-slide and instead of maneuvering out of the way as mission control told it to, it decided to look at the shiny rocks instead and got crushed in the process?

      You have been watching too many SUV commercials ;)

      --

      my religion lies somewhere between buddhism and super monkey ball - pamphlet?
    5. Re:Could this be a problem in the future by Gleng · · Score: 4, Funny
      "study these rocks, then move towards the crater"

      I wonder if they used Inform for the control interface.

      Mars
      You are on the surface of Mars, millions of kilometers from Earth where you started your journey. The sun is rising in the red sky, only slightly easing the chill of the Martian morning.

      There are some rocks here.

      > look at rocks

      I only understood you as far as you wanting to look at the rocks.

      > take rocks

      rocks: That's hardly portable.

      > examine rocks

      You see no rocks here.

      > quit

      Are you sure you want to quit? y

      --
      "Proudly Posting Without Reading The Article"
    6. Re:Could this be a problem in the future by SEWilco · · Score: 3, Funny

      Actually, the crater was named after the Bonneville Salt Flats, because they anticipated being able to achieve these tremendous speeds.

  8. I think I can, I think I can, I think I can by wheany · · Score: 4, Funny

    OOOOOH, Shiny!

  9. Going to get Modded to hell but.... by AbbyNormal · · Score: 5, Funny

    can't resist urge.

    Go SPEED Racer! Go Speed Racer!

    --
    Sig it.
  10. Quit messing around! by QuiK_ChaoS · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Spirit! Quit playing in the dirt! We have 100 more feet to go!"

    "(sad R2-D2 sound)"

  11. Wow. Amazing. Not. by moehoward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Didn't the Soviet built lunar rovers go much further in a single day back in the early 70's? What sort of over-hyped/overly-specific record is this?

    "And the award for longest roving in the past 3 weeks on a neighboring planet by an American robot who's name rhymes with 'kirit' goes to...."

    I demand a recount!

    --
    "If you want to improve, be content to be thought foolish and stupid." - Epictetus
    1. Re:Wow. Amazing. Not. by mikerich · · Score: 5, Informative
      Didn't the Soviet built lunar rovers go much further in a single day back in the early 70's?

      Lunokhod could manage between 0.8 and 2 kilometres per hour depending on soil conditions and slope. Lunokhod 1 survived for 10 months and covered 10.54 km, Lunokhod 2 lasted only 3 months but did 37 km. I'm not sure how much of that time was 'active' since the rovers were shut down during the 14 day Lunar night.

      However neither vehicle was autonomous, they were remote controlled from Earth. This is possible with a 2 second lag to the Moon, but unfeasible on Mars.

      Best wishes,
      Mike.

    2. Re:Wow. Amazing. Not. by vt0asta · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What sort of over-hyped/overly-specific record is this?

      Spirit is only competing with it's self. 88 feet is further than 70 feet, which was it's previous farthest distance traveled. If you're not going to RTFA, RTFS. Sheesh

      --
      No.
    3. Re:Wow. Amazing. Not. by C0vardeAn0nim0 · · Score: 5, Informative

      a lunar day is equivalent to several earth days. this means the russian rover could drive across the moon on solar power for much longer than spirit. the drawback is that it also had to sleep for almost 2 earth weeks at a time.

      --
      What ? Me, worry ?
    4. Re:Wow. Amazing. Not. by FrostedWheat · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yes they did. But remember, that was on the moon and that's not that far away. The round trip for a radio signal would be just over one second. This allows for direct control of the probes from Earth. What the soviets landed where basically lunar RC cars. (Not to say it wasn't impressive! It definitly was for the time.)

      Now Mars is a different matter. It's a LOT farther. A radio singal takes over 12 minutes to get there (and only when Mars is on our side of the Sun). The round trip would be 25 minutes. It would be impossible to directly drive the probe anything more than a few meters at a time with that lag. You'd get nowhere!

      What's impressive here is that these rovers can drive themselves! They are just told where to go and they make there best effort to get there. It's really very impressive.

    5. Re:Wow. Amazing. Not. by linoleo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What sort of over-hyped/overly-specific record is this?

      NASA has the unfortunate habit of framing everything in terms of firsts and records, as if space exploration was some sort of spectator sport. I've lost count of how often I've seen the headline "Hubble spies oldest galaxy" - well duh, since Hubble is the only instrument in its class for imaging faint red-shifted objects, I'd be worried if it didn't find a new "oldest known galaxy" every month or so. The current "first sneeze/fart/ping/macarena/kernel panic on another planet" spate of Spirit/Opportunity PR is in the same vein.

      Through a PR machinery that caters to the lowest common denominator, NASA systematically undermines the many good reasons we have for exploring space, and thus ends up shooting itself in the foot. If you reduce your own work to a mere set of pointless Guiness Book of Records entries, you shouldn't be surprised if people start to wonder whether it's worth paying billions of dollars for it. What NASA really needs is a tool to filter all superlatives from its press releases.

      PS: a NASA TV channel that isn't dumbed down so much would also be nice.

      --
      Be faithful to your obsessions. Identify them and be faithful to them, let them guide you like a sleepwalker. JG Ballard
    6. Re:Wow. Amazing. Not. by mikerich · · Score: 3, Informative
      If I recall correctly, the moon doesn't rotate on it's axis, therefore, a lunar day is forever. That's why the moon has a dark side and a light side.

      It's a common misconception. The Moon does rotate on its axis - but one rotation takes exactly the same time as it takes for the Moon to orbit the Earth.

      Still don't believe me? Put a chair in the middle of the room (that will be the Earth). Now (slowly) walk in a circle around the chair always facing the chair. When you've completed the circle you will have faced every wall in the room - but anyone sitting in the chair will only have seen your face.

      What this means for the Moon is that every part of the surface experiences a continuous day 14 Earth days long, followed by an equally long, chilly, night.

      Instead of speaking of a permanent light side and a permanent dark side, it is correct to speak of a near side (the bit seen from Earth) and a far side (which is never seen from Earth).

      Best wishes,
      Mike.

    7. Re:Wow. Amazing. Not. by QuantumFTL · · Score: 3, Insightful

      NASA has the unfortunate habit of framing everything in terms of firsts and records, as if space exploration was some sort of spectator sport. I've lost count of how often I've seen the headline "Hubble spies oldest galaxy".

      I agree that it is sometimes a bit cliche, however there are many scientific reasons to be concerned about these "records." Record-setting missions do not merely mark achievements, they also provide data in regimes not previously explored. The "oldest known galaxy" being observed at provides us with a valuable data point, one which is unique at the time of the writing. No one wants to hear that "Hubble Finds Galaxies Just Like Every Other Galaxy" or "Spirit Finds Another Rock". News is about what is *NEW*. People are interested in occurances which are novel, different, and exciting.

      NASA is dedicated to pushing the envelope in science and engineering. There are many obstacles in space exploration and I for one see absolutely nothing wrong with being happy/excited that we have overcome the numerous significant problems to do what we do. Spirit has the most advanced autnomous navigation software of any (declassified) space probe yet, and it is awesome to see that it is working very well! Also, spirit is in an area that makes mobility a bit difficult as there are many rocks that it must detect.

      It is my opinion (and not necessarily that of NASA) that NASA PR should seek to provide a multi-tier service which caters not merely to the lowest common denominator, but also the the more scientifically inclinded citizens who seek more details.

      What NASA really needs is a tool to filter all superlatives from its press releases.

      Superlatives are why we are there. If we want things that are ordinary, we can stay stuck here on earth for the next 5 billion years.

      Disclaimer: I work on MER as a software engineer.

      Cheers,
      Justin

  12. What?! by eibhear · · Score: 3, Funny
    ...but Spirit didn't cover the full distance because it spent more time than initially planned studying rocks and soil along the way.

    Do we have to put blinkers on the little fella?

    Eibhear

    1. Re:What?! by kf8vn · · Score: 4, Funny

      Actually, not only did it not cover the full distance, it also left it's right turn signal on.

    2. Re:What?! by Amiga+Lover · · Score: 4, Funny

      It needs to pop out it's supply of ritalin. I think it went something like this...

      *rove rove rove rove OOOH SHINY ROCK*

      and then wasted half the day playing with the shiny rock

  13. I am really worried by Ignorant+Aardvark · · Score: 4, Funny

    How do we know it was actually studying rocks ... maybe it was, oh, working on that Q-36 Illidium Space Modulator Death Ray?!?!

  14. latest information can be found here.. by kernkopje · · Score: 5, Informative

    The latest information on Spirit's and Opportunity's adventures can be found here!

    1. Re:latest information can be found here.. by noselasd · · Score: 4, Informative

      Nice summaries, many which doesn't reach "Press Release" as well can be found here

  15. Who is controlling this thing? by scorp1us · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I highly doubt the vehicle is that autonomous that they can say, "heay, head off bearing 110 deg, for 50m and take photos of interesting things along the way"

    I always figured that mission control would give it vector commands like that, but that any kind of inspection would be manually done by instructions from mission control?

    I can understand that it might have some self-preservation features, like slow down if too much wobble, or if grade is steep, but it seems like that things is really calling the shots.

    Maybe we're not as far as logn as we thought, a la Stanly Kubrik's 2001 space oddesy.

    --
    Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
    1. Re:Who is controlling this thing? by Niles_Stonne · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think it is a combination of the two...

      Mission control sends a command like:

      "Go to Rock A"
      "Extend Arm, place payload element X on Rock"
      "Let Payload element X analyze rock A"
      "Switch to Payload Element Y"
      "Let Payload Element Y Analyze Rock A"
      (...repeat for each element Mission control wants to use...)
      "Stow Arm"
      "Navigate at bearing of 110deg until Z time"

      Each of the science payloads may take an unknown amount of time to perform it's task - the rock grinder probably moves at different speeds based on the density of the rock.

      Also, the driving algorythm probably takes more time to analyze no-so-good paths than good paths.

      --
      Sticks and Stones may break my bones, but copyright will always protect me.
  16. Was that during one martian day? by Jugalator · · Score: 3, Informative

    One martian day is apparently 24.7 hours.

    So I guess it moved at this amazing speed? :-)

    --
    Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  17. We apologise for the delay on platform 1... by SmackCrackandPot · · Score: 4, Funny

    ... as there is the wrong type of dust on the ground.

  18. Hmmm... by benlinkknilneb · · Score: 5, Funny

    Are they sure it was 88 feet? Could've been meters...

    --
    It must be Thursday... I never could get the hang of Thursdays.
  19. Attention Span? by timsmells · · Score: 3, Funny

    Spirit didn't cover the full distance because it spent more time than initially planned studying rocks and soil along the way So they sent a robot with ADD to Mars?

  20. medicine by rubenmiranda · · Score: 3, Funny

    > Engineers had hoped the rover would travel 164 feet, but
    > Spirit didn't cover the full distance because it spent more
    > time than initially planned studying rocks and soil along the
    > way.

    Sounds like the li'l guy could use some Ritalin! Hey stop playing in the dirt!

  21. For the metric-minded by rjw57 · · Score: 3, Informative

    88 feet is roughtly 25 metres, one width of an Olympic sized swimming pool.

    --
    Rich
  22. No it doesn't by essreenim · · Score: 5, Funny

    My grandmother in the last 5 years has had an average speed of 0.000004mph. This is because she moves only every now and then.

    The Spirit rover does 0.00000000001mph on average since it landed on Mars because most of the time
    it does nothing.

    They need to give the remote controls to some punk kids that dont know its importance.

    If they did that they would have found beagle,
    discovered that Mars is just a shitty desert, overloaded Nasa's database of names for every shitty litte rock they find, and eventually drove
    off a cliff giving us spectacular images of Mars!

  23. Re:One short trip for Artificial Intelligence by turnstyle · · Score: 5, Interesting
    The robotics is cool, but I'd say even cooler is the artificial intelligence.

    The rover's stereo vision dynamically builds a 3D representation of its environment, and then figures out safe paths within that map.

    That's all necessary because it just takes too long to specifically instruct each step (it's a 10 minute round trip at the speed of light to send instructions -- and so you want the rover to have some autonomy).

    --
    Here's what I do: Bitty Browser & Andromeda
  24. 88 'feet'?! You mean Mars hasn't gone metric?! by ewg · · Score: 5, Funny

    88 'feet'?! You mean Mars hasn't gone metric?!

    --
    org.slashdot.post.SignatureNotFoundException: ewg
  25. Feet ?! Stop these anachronisms! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Metric units please ! - NASA have enough trouble with Imperial-Metric conversions without the Slashdot breeding another backward Imperial generation.

    ( Of course, with the pathetic spelling and grammar here, American Literature also seems doomed... ).

  26. This is the voice of... by pandrijeczko · · Score: 4, Funny
    NASA should BE CAREFUL!

    This is almost exactly the same way that Captain Scarlet woke up the Mysterons...

    --
    Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
  27. It traveled 88 feet BUT .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    It had it's left turn signal blinking the entire way :)

  28. Re:One short trip for Artificial Intelligence by cozziewozzie · · Score: 5, Informative

    Strictly speaking, that's not a domain of artificial intelligence, but pure computer vision. There are known techniques for building a map, given processed camera images, and there is usually no reasoning involved. Just a simple algorithm to find the shortest path. The search space is usually small enough not to warrant AI techniques.

    Of course, it is possible that they are using higher-level AI techniques for finding the optimal path, but I doubt it as the classical image processing techniques are fast and robust enough for this sort of task.

  29. My dog has the same algorithms by panurge · · Score: 5, Funny
    Yes, my dog never gets as far as you would expect in a given time because he has to investigate things on the way. And I think he's looking for evidence of life - certainly if you saw what he puts his nose into you'd agree it was pretty organic.

    Computers may not yet pass the Turing test, but it's pretty good that we've managed to get them up to pooch standard.

    --
    Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
  30. It's like going for a walk with a kid! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Anyone who has tried to go for a walk with a 2 or 3 year old kid knows what I'm talking about. You want to walk, but the annoying little brat will stop and examine very carefully every piece of litter, little stone, gravel or mark on the floor. Half way through the whole thing you'll get tired and just go home.

    1. Re:It's like going for a walk with a kid! by linoleo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Anyone who has tried to go for a walk with a 2 or 3 year old kid knows what I'm talking about. You want to walk, but the annoying little brat will stop and examine very carefully every piece of litter, little stone, gravel or mark on the floor. Half way through the whole thing you'll get tired and just go home.

      Exploring that piece of litter, stone, gravel, mark on the floor is the whole point of the walk for a little kid. Ditto for the Mars rovers. Our concepts of what a walk should be like do not apply - there is no predetermined itinerary that must be covered, only wide open eyes that want to understand all the marvels that they see.

      --
      Be faithful to your obsessions. Identify them and be faithful to them, let them guide you like a sleepwalker. JG Ballard
  31. Tomorrow's News... by Ash87 · · Score: 5, Funny

    The Spirit Rover breaks its record once again by travelling 185 feet - unfortunately, this was due to it getting a bit TOO close to the crater, and was 185 feet downwards.

  32. Re:One short trip for Artificial Intelligence by turnstyle · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I'll not quibble over what formally counts as AI, but it seems pretty intelligent to me -- the rover dynamically builds a 3D map, identifies danger spots, and avoids them in order to get to a goal.

    Also check out the QT animation on the NASA site titled "Rover Navigation 101: Autonomous Rover Navigation"

    AI or not, it's pretty darn cool.

    --
    Here's what I do: Bitty Browser & Andromeda
  33. sounds familiar by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...but Spirit didn't cover the full distance because it spent more time than initially planned studying rocks and soil along the way.

    Anyone who's been hiking with a 4 year old knows what that's like.

  34. Anybody see the PBS Nova special by rqqrtnb · · Score: 4, Informative

    After watching that special I have more respect and admiration for the people at JPL. Alot of creativity and problem solving went into this project and I'm really happy for all of them.

  35. Get A Life by Walrus99 · · Score: 3, Funny

    The thing is that the rover is not looking for signs of life, just for rocks and possibly signs of water. Its obvious that the aliens that control the U.S. government had NASA design it that way. The aliens don't have as much clout with the European Space Agency so they weren't able to keep the creators of the Beagle from designing it to look for life. They had to disable it once it got to the planet. This way they won't find any evidence of life that gets to the surface from the underground Martian cities.

  36. lag time by Cappy+Red · · Score: 3, Informative

    If there's an impending rock-slide, then the rover gets crushed. Remember that whatever the scientists in control see is around five minutes old, and that any directions of avoidance take an addition five minutes or so to reach the rover.

    Besides, I don't believe they're letting the rover choose its own targets, nor did they give it power to override an imperative command.

    *honk*

    --
    This is my sig. It's prescription, I swear. I need it for reading things... on the other side of things
  37. Re:One short trip for Artificial Intelligence by cozziewozzie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, that seems to be the 'common' understanding of AI, but in the computer science (and other scientific fields), it has a more specific meaning. Otherwise, factoring large numbers would also be considered AI, although there is nothing intelligent about it, given a good algorithm. Finding that algorithm is what would require intelligence.

    Here is a definition I like:

    AI is the capacity of a digital computer or computer-controlled robot device to perform tasks commonly associated with the higher intellectual processes characteristic of humans, such as the ability to reason, discover meaning, generalize, or learn from past experience. The term is also frequently applied to that branch of computer science concerned with the development of systems endowed with such capabilities. --- Herbert A. Simon, Professor of Computer Science and Psychology, Carnegie Mellon University

    I am nitpicking here, but given an algorithm to extract edges and corners from two images, using the camera calibration values to calculate distance, and creating a map based on these data does not require intelligence, and as such isn't strictly AI.

    The robot still follows strict instructions which find the optimal path. It will not learn if this algorithm fails a certain number of times, it will not generalise to make future computation quicker, like a human would. It does not have a concept of the obstacles. It does not get more proficient after doing the same for a while. So, even though it's a brilliant example of applied computer vision and autonomous navigation, there is very little of what is considered AI involved. Hope this clears it up a bit.

  38. Get Maestro and check it out! by Lispy · · Score: 4, Informative

    You can learn more about how the rover works by downloading NASAs Maestro Program. It's a RAM hungry Javaapp that is nicely documented and let's you plan your own mission using their stripped down version of the Uplink-Browser. Give it a shot, it's pretty interesting (well, at least if you got some spare time on your hands to fiddle with it and are into Marsroving at all!).

    cu,
    Lispy

  39. Re:One short trip for Artificial Intelligence by cozziewozzie · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I've seen no proof that the Rover reasons, discovers meaning, generalizes or learns from past experience. It just runs a program which gives it very direct commands.

    It's a bit like this: If I ask you to get some good tomatoes, you would break this up into several steps: Go to the market, find the tomatoes, then select some good ones. But what is a 'good' tomato? You will have to rely on your experience, your taste, and the past input from others to determine what a good tomato is. Then you would choose the tomatoes which best fit the ideal you have in your mind.

    A computer cannot do that. It has no concept of what a tomato is. It doesn't deduce properties from past experiences. You can program a robot to go to the market (by giving it specific instructions on how to do that), then have it pick up tomatoes which have a certain height, weight, a given hue, and a softness, all expressed in measurable units. The robot would bring back some 'good' tomatoes according to these requirements, but it wouldn't be doing anything remotely intelligent, even though it might look like it from the outside.

    Now, an AI approach to this would be to model a tomato internally, for example, using a Bayes net of different fruits, associated with different properties. A tomato would be grouped with similar fruits according to some characteristics. The computer would learn through repeated observations (like a human does), and propagate its deductions throughout the net. For example, a squashed tomato and a squashed pepper are both 'bad' fruit/vegetables, and a red pepper and a red tomato would both be 'good', but a green pepper can be good, while a green tomato cannot. The network gets updated to accommodate these observations and build a better model, up to the point where the computer can pick the 'good' fruit without being told exactly what it is.

    See, in the second example, there is learning, there is deduction, and there is reasoning, as well as generalization. In the first one, there isn't. That is the fundamental difference.